I'm going to dissent with the advice of getting a tripod. The key to blur free pictures in a
stage setting is to use a fast
shutter speed that freezes actor's motion, as well as camera shake.
With the newer DSLR's having such usable high
ISO (that in turn will give you a higher
shutter speed), that reduces the need for a tripod.
As a counterpart to using a tripod with long lenses, choose a
lens that has
image stabilization. A IS
lens will offer pretty much all the same benefits as a tripod when shooting in the
shutter speed ranges that you need to freeze human motion, and offers the freedom of easy movement.
The rule of thumb for
hand holding is to make sure your
shutter speed is at least 1/
focal length. So for example if your zoomed to 55mm, and your
shutter speed is 1/60 or higher, a tripod won't offer you any assistance (unless you have really shaky hands - the flip side to that is that some people are steadier and can
hand hold at even lower
shutter speeds. At 55mm, I can go as low at 1/20 before I see any camera shake).
While a tripod will offer shake free pictures at
shutter speeds of a few seconds, if there is any human movement on
stage, they will all be blurred. To freeze motion you need around 1/60 for standard walking and even higher if there is fast movement or dancing. This will put you over the
shutter speed needed to eliminate
hand held camera shake. Here's a picture that show this. Taken in '06 during Teahouse Of The August Moon.
Hand held with the original Digital Rebel (300D), 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS
lens @ 50mm,
ISO 800, f/4.5, 1/30
shutter speed. As you can see, there is no camera shake, but since the actor on the left was moving, he is blurred.
I have lots of pictures from when we did Footloose in '04 where the set is perfectly
clear, but all the actors are blurry. This was the first show I ever took pictures of. I had a 35mm film Canon Rebel Ti SLR, with the 75-300 4.0-5.6
lens on a tripod in the back of the
house. I don't remember the
shutter speeds used since it was a film camera, but any human movement was blurred.
Here's a picture I took back in '05 during Guys & Dolls. Taken
hand held with the Rebel, 70-200 2.8 IS
lens @ 105mm,
ISO 800, f/2.8, 1/100
shutter speed. As you can see, everything is nice and sharp. I was able to freeze the jumping actor at only 1/100 since I caught him at the peak of his jump when he wasn't really moving at that instant. If the picture would have been taken an instant earlier or later, he would have been slightly blurred.
Here's another picture that shows what the IS can do. Taken in '06 during Teahouse.
Hand held, 70-200 2.8 IS
lens @ 70mm,
ISO 400, f/2.8, 1/25
shutter speed.
They are rather pricey, but my two ultimate
lens recommendations for Canon are the 17-55 2.8 IS for shooting from close up, and the 70-200 2.8 IS for shooting from the back of the
house. If the IS is too pricey, at least go for a
lens that is a constant 2.8. Although, since the newer cameras are doing so well with higher
ISO, you can even start to get fast enough
shutter speeds with a slower kit
lens like the 18-55 3.5-5.6 IS
lens, but it won't be as good as the first two lenses I mentioned.
Michael